Who Should Adapt ‘At Home’?: Microdynamics of Social Exchange for Reciprocal Integration Among Migrants and Hosts

Research output: Contribution to conferencePaperResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Large-scale sociological studies have confirmed the rise of prejudice against migrants in various European societies (Semyonov et al., 2006), but the underlying micro-social dynamics and implications for host engagement with migrants, and vice versa, are not well understood. An understanding of exchange dynamics between hosts and migrants is crucial in designing measures to support harmonious relations, improve professional and social opportunities for both groups, and mitigate potentially self-exclusionary tendencies, such as radicalization (Lyons-Padilla et al., 2015). Host societies that are unable or unwilling to engage in exchange with migrants risk missing out on their potential professional and/or social contributions; and even experience challenges to their collective sense of non-belonging ‘at home’ (Kymlicka, 2013). Migrants who cannot or will not exchange with hosts may find their access to jobs, financial services, and education limited, hindering their social integration and depriving them of ‘participation parity’ (Fraser, 2003) and a sense of belonging in the host society (Cheah et al., 2013; Croucher et al., 2016; Salignac et al., 2016), and increasing the risk that both groups may engage in self-protective strategies such as self-exclusion or ‘self-encapsulation’ (EC, 2008; Rezaei, 2002).
Large-scale sociological studies have confirmed the rise of prejudice against migrants in various European societies (Semyonov et al., 2006), but the underlying micro-social dynamics and implications for host engagement with migrants, and vice versa, are not well understood. An understanding of exchange dynamics between hosts and migrants is crucial in designing measures to support harmonious relations, improve professional and social opportunities for both groups, and mitigate potentially self-exclusionary tendencies, such as radicalization (Lyons-Padilla et al., 2015). Host societies that are unable or unwilling to engage in exchange with migrants risk missing out on their potential professional and/or social contributions; and even experience challenges to their collective sense of non-belonging ‘at home’ (Kymlicka, 2013). Migrants who cannot or will not exchange with hosts may find their access to jobs, financial services, and education limited, hindering their social integration and depriving them of ‘participation parity’ (Fraser, 2003) and a sense of belonging in the host society (Cheah et al., 2013; Croucher et al., 2016; Salignac et al., 2016), and increasing the risk that both groups may engage in self-protective strategies such as self-exclusion or ‘self-encapsulation’ (EC, 2008; Rezaei, 2002).

Conference

ConferenceThe 33rd EGOS Colloquium 2017
Number33
LocationCopenhagen Business School
CountryDenmark
CityCopenhagen
Period06/07/201708/07/2017
Internet address

Cite this

@conference{80d729809c38428e8cfa8779589a02eb,
title = "Who Should Adapt ‘At Home’?: Microdynamics of Social Exchange for Reciprocal Integration Among Migrants and Hosts",
abstract = "Large-scale sociological studies have confirmed the rise of prejudice against migrants in various European societies (Semyonov et al., 2006), but the underlying micro-social dynamics and implications for host engagement with migrants, and vice versa, are not well understood. An understanding of exchange dynamics between hosts and migrants is crucial in designing measures to support harmonious relations, improve professional and social opportunities for both groups, and mitigate potentially self-exclusionary tendencies, such as radicalization (Lyons-Padilla et al., 2015). Host societies that are unable or unwilling to engage in exchange with migrants risk missing out on their potential professional and/or social contributions; and even experience challenges to their collective sense of non-belonging ‘at home’ (Kymlicka, 2013). Migrants who cannot or will not exchange with hosts may find their access to jobs, financial services, and education limited, hindering their social integration and depriving them of ‘participation parity’ (Fraser, 2003) and a sense of belonging in the host society (Cheah et al., 2013; Croucher et al., 2016; Salignac et al., 2016), and increasing the risk that both groups may engage in self-protective strategies such as self-exclusion or ‘self-encapsulation’ (EC, 2008; Rezaei, 2002).",
author = "Minna Paunova and Maribel Blasco",
year = "2017",
language = "English",
note = "null ; Conference date: 06-07-2017 Through 08-07-2017",
url = "https://www.egosnet.org/2017_copenhagen/general_theme",

}

Who Should Adapt ‘At Home’? Microdynamics of Social Exchange for Reciprocal Integration Among Migrants and Hosts. / Paunova, Minna ; Blasco, Maribel.

2017. Paper presented at The 33rd EGOS Colloquium 2017, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Research output: Contribution to conferencePaperResearchpeer-review

TY - CONF

T1 - Who Should Adapt ‘At Home’?

T2 - Microdynamics of Social Exchange for Reciprocal Integration Among Migrants and Hosts

AU - Paunova,Minna

AU - Blasco,Maribel

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - Large-scale sociological studies have confirmed the rise of prejudice against migrants in various European societies (Semyonov et al., 2006), but the underlying micro-social dynamics and implications for host engagement with migrants, and vice versa, are not well understood. An understanding of exchange dynamics between hosts and migrants is crucial in designing measures to support harmonious relations, improve professional and social opportunities for both groups, and mitigate potentially self-exclusionary tendencies, such as radicalization (Lyons-Padilla et al., 2015). Host societies that are unable or unwilling to engage in exchange with migrants risk missing out on their potential professional and/or social contributions; and even experience challenges to their collective sense of non-belonging ‘at home’ (Kymlicka, 2013). Migrants who cannot or will not exchange with hosts may find their access to jobs, financial services, and education limited, hindering their social integration and depriving them of ‘participation parity’ (Fraser, 2003) and a sense of belonging in the host society (Cheah et al., 2013; Croucher et al., 2016; Salignac et al., 2016), and increasing the risk that both groups may engage in self-protective strategies such as self-exclusion or ‘self-encapsulation’ (EC, 2008; Rezaei, 2002).

AB - Large-scale sociological studies have confirmed the rise of prejudice against migrants in various European societies (Semyonov et al., 2006), but the underlying micro-social dynamics and implications for host engagement with migrants, and vice versa, are not well understood. An understanding of exchange dynamics between hosts and migrants is crucial in designing measures to support harmonious relations, improve professional and social opportunities for both groups, and mitigate potentially self-exclusionary tendencies, such as radicalization (Lyons-Padilla et al., 2015). Host societies that are unable or unwilling to engage in exchange with migrants risk missing out on their potential professional and/or social contributions; and even experience challenges to their collective sense of non-belonging ‘at home’ (Kymlicka, 2013). Migrants who cannot or will not exchange with hosts may find their access to jobs, financial services, and education limited, hindering their social integration and depriving them of ‘participation parity’ (Fraser, 2003) and a sense of belonging in the host society (Cheah et al., 2013; Croucher et al., 2016; Salignac et al., 2016), and increasing the risk that both groups may engage in self-protective strategies such as self-exclusion or ‘self-encapsulation’ (EC, 2008; Rezaei, 2002).

M3 - Paper

ER -